If you somehow automated organization and payment through blockchain contracts and had a way to describe requirements by code, I think it would be killer.
A document to help you start a tech cooperative
31–40 of 91 posts
Re: A document to help you start a tech cooperative
#32Back in 19th century USA, during industrialization, the idea of working for someone came across to many as a form of wage-slavery. Going from farming or trade-skills to factories working, one gave up any control in their own worker rights and planning of their business. It seems fundamentally unfair that in most industries you don't have any real share of the company, or any say in the direction of it. People who con…
Re: A document to help you start a tech cooperative
#33I mean absolutely no offense by this, but the logo has an uncanny resemblance to DickButt. Maybe change the logo? Or, not, if it's not a problem. I don't know what I would do if I were in your position and someone pointed this out to me.
It is quite clearly a stylised human head.
Re: A document to help you start a tech cooperative
#34Back in 19th century USA, during industrialization, the idea of working for someone came across to many as a form of wage-slavery. Going from farming or trade-skills to factories working, one gave up any control in their own worker rights and planning of their business. It seems fundamentally unfair that in most industries you don't have any real share of the company, or any say in the direction of it. People who con…
> People who control those companies are solely executives or wall street share holders, not the people who spend countless hours making the company run and function As an entrepreneur, it's actually pretty difficult to find folks who prefer getting compensated primarily in shares rather than cash. If you want to have significant ownership in a company that usually isn't much of a challenge.
It's probably going to take some effort if we want to bring the idea back that employees should have a say in the direction and leadership of a business.
Re: A document to help you start a tech cooperative
#35- https://github.com/nilenso/cooperative-agreement.
We've also written and talked about it a bit:
- https://blog.nilenso.com/blog/2014/11/19/huh-a-software-coop...
Re: A document to help you start a tech cooperative
#36Back in 19th century USA, during industrialization, the idea of working for someone came across to many as a form of wage-slavery. Going from farming or trade-skills to factories working, one gave up any control in their own worker rights and planning of their business. It seems fundamentally unfair that in most industries you don't have any real share of the company, or any say in the direction of it. People who con…
> People who control those companies are solely executives or wall street share holders, not the people who spend countless hours making the company run and function As an entrepreneur, it's actually pretty difficult to find folks who prefer getting compensated primarily in shares rather than cash. If you want to have significant ownership in a company that usually isn't much of a challenge.
Re: A document to help you start a tech cooperative
#37If you somehow automated organization and payment through blockchain contracts and had a way to describe requirements by code, I think it would be killer.
That worked out great for Etherium and the DAO.
Re: A document to help you start a tech cooperative
#38From one of the annotations: > I'm fundamentally opposed to making people buy their way into the company, it feels like a scam to me. You don't have to demonstrate your value "to" the company -- we each as individuals hold far more value than this taxable structure that can be dissolved when it no longer benefits the members. Also, whatever value a person has is being brought by their skills, thinking, and experience…
Re: A document to help you start a tech cooperative
#39Regarding the bullet point lists in 3.2 and 4.2. They don't explicitly state that whether it's an "and" or an "or" condition list. Is that really safe? Are lists like this by convention assumed to be of the "and" type?